Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Generally me]

Tiruin Just generally finding more about tactics for each role. And how to play the game. Also because everyone else is asking questions so I figured I should as well.

Anyone is it possible to forgoe voting for a round.

Unvote

[origamiscienceguy]

Anyone is it possible to forgoe voting for a round.

Yes, you could just not vote anything. Or you could vote for no lynch.

[Deus Asmoth]

Generally, what advantage would you see in not lynching?

[Jack A T]

It was Tiruin who came up with the way of tracking votes.  She cleared a table, put sticky notes with each person's name on it, and brought out the model ships she'd made for all the researchers the year before.  Roo, the outside investigator, was given some piece of junk from around the lab.  All set their ships (and junk) down where they wanted.
Boatcount:
- Peradon - RRS zombie urist  (1)
- Teneb - HMS TheDarkStar (1)
- TheDarkStar - BRP Tiruin (1)
- roo - (0)
- origamiscienceguy - HMCS Teneb, USS Peradon  (2)
- Generally me - (0)
- Deus Asmoth - (0)
- Tiruin - (0)
- zombie urist - (0)
No Lynch - (0)

Not voting: LÉ Deus Asmoth, HMNZS origamiscienceguy, NRP Generally me, roo

Day ends at 2:40 PM PST May 20th.

Jack: Boatcount please! I may be busy in the next few days because of Finals et al*. Also may I know if I'm using that term* correctly?

Tiruin: Not quite sure why you're asking me, but ehhhhhhh... not a bad use of "et al," I think (I'm no expert), but not a great use either.  "because of Finals and others" doesn't have a great ring to it.

[zombie urist]

Though, seeing as how the interaction was entirely between me and OSG, I suppose from all ya'lls questions, he would have gathered that I suspect him. So, saying nothing wont do any good anymore, thanks to you.
I suspect OSG, and here's my rational:

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

I will be looking at the possible motives for the above post of OSG's. As I see it there are 3 possible motives:
(1)That OSG is the cultist, and he is trying to pin something on me, based on an RVS vote.
(2)That OSG is Town, and he legitimately thought that an RVS vote is scummy if it is placed on top of an existing post. (I find this to be less likely; I have seen what OSG plays like, and he knows better.)
(3)That OSG is either Town or the Cultist, and was trying to do a gambit. (This also is less likely, mainly because of I have never seen OSG do any gambits...)
So, you see, granted that OSG's vote was legitimate, there are only two possibilities; one of them being that he is Scum, the other that he is stupid town. I dont think OSG is stupid town, thus he is probably Scum.
With that said, OSG.

This is pretty dumb. I honestly don't see how you could think that he immediately thought you were scummy based on a single post. What OSG did was very reasonable.

I didn't want him to know I suspected him. Once scum know that someone is hot on their trail, they put up more defenses around them. I wanted to get more from OSG so I could get a rock-solid case that doesn't rely on a single post of his.

If this was your first game, this line of thinking might make sense. If he was scum and was being overly defensive you can build a case based off that. You could have pressured him more to get information.

Sorry Peradon it looks like you're scrambling more than OSG in your recent posts. And for that my vote will stay.

Generally me, so far, what do you think are the biggest, and most important differences between forum mafia and traditional mafia? What are you doing to adapt to these discrepancies?

It's getting too late in the day to be asking RVS questions.

If you were the cultist what would you first move be?

Are you asking because you're the cultist?

[Generally me]

Generally, what advantage would you see in not lynching?

None. But you are more likely to lose a friendly player on the first round than getting the cultist leader.

[Generally me]

zombie urist what do you my answer will be to that question

[Deus Asmoth]

Generally, for your first post, why ask if no-lynching is an option if you see no advantage in actually going through with it? For your second, what was your reasoning behind the question then?

[TheDarkStar]

Time to read through the weekend backlog of questions and other posts. Unvote because my vote was an RVS vote at the very beginning of the day.

[origamiscienceguy]

Peradon, I am starting to agree with Zombie Urist's point about you. You are freaking out way too much about this post.

Also, Teneb.

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

Your reply is reasonable at first:

The real question is: Why not? I was adding a little extra pressure to see what his reaction would be. Do you think this is scummy of me?

but then you claim it was part of a gambit, but give no results or evidence that you were doing a gambit.

What kind of question would you have me ask? Another random question that does absolutely nothing, such as "Why are you scum"? No, that's pointless. I just voted for him to see what kind of reactions I would get, as a test so to speak. With just one vote on someone, that person doesn't feel any pressure at all; It's to be expected. But when I add another one on, it starts getting serious.

In short, I was doing a test-gambit of sorts. One which has given interesting results. Unvote

This is so weak and a non-answer. What results did you get?

I'd actually rather not say, because doing so might put the scum on guard a little. I'll tell you later if I can more stuff together.

You say you'll tell us if you get more stuff together, but that hasn't seemed remotely close to happening yet, which leads me to believe that you completely lied about that gambit.

At this point, I had forgotten about your gambt because I was trying to piece together the arguments made by roo and others. You then attack me with one of the most blatant case of false dilema fallacy I have seen in a long time.

So, you see, granted that OSG's vote was legitimate, there are only two possibilities; one of them being that he is Scum, the other that he is stupid town. I dont think OSG is stupid town, thus he is probably Scum.

With that said, OSG.

Throughout the whole rest of the game until now, I had not been concerned about you, but you still made grudges about my RVS vote on you, EVEN AFTER I HAD REMOVED MY VOTE. You still think my vote was scum-hut concerned.

So you are saying that the vote you put on me was in no way serious?

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

That sure sounds like a serious vote to me.

You then build a case claiming that I am scrambling to find reasons to vote you, DESPITE ME NOT EVEN VOTING YOU.

I am singling you out because you voted someone who already had a vote on them. If you have cultist intentions, you would do this to put pressure on them hoping they would say something that would get everybody to vote them.

Isnt putting pressure on someone pretty much the sole purpose of an RVS vote? At the very least, my putting extra pressure is a null-tell, because town pressures other people as well.

This sounds like you are scrambling to me. My vote will stay on you for now.

It does seem like you are the one that is scrambling because your arguments against me either din't make sense or are full of fallacies.

[TheDarkStar]

But then something bopped my side. TDS: Counterquery.
Now I've no idea how I can seek out the jailor if I'm a regular townie--what context supports your question which gives me that indication of that guess? It is a seemingly pointed question here.

In the scenario, you'd have guessed that someone was a jailor based on their posts. Of course it wouldn't be certain, but you could get an idea about who the jailor is.

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

The real question is: Why not? I was adding a little extra pressure to see what his reaction would be. Do you think this is scummy of me?

Why did you do this instead of pressuring someone else? What makes putting more pressure on someone a better option?

This is so weak and a non-answer. What results did you get?

I'd actually rather not say, because doing so might put the scum on guard a little. I'll tell you later if I can more stuff together.

So now I'm sure you had nothing, you backed off from your rvs vote because osg was pressuring you, then made up doing a gambit after getting questioned, and now are just stalling for time.

That would be in your interpretation.

Though, seeing as how the interaction was entirely between me and OSG, I suppose from all ya'lls questions, he would have gathered that I suspect him. So, saying nothing wont do any good anymore, thanks to you.

I suspect OSG, and here's my rational:

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

I will be looking at the possible motives for the above post of OSG's. As I see it there are 3 possible motives:

(1)That OSG is the cultist, and he is trying to pin something on me, based on an RVS vote.
(2)That OSG is Town, and he legitimately thought that an RVS vote is scummy if it is placed on top of an existing post. (I find this to be less likely; I have seen what OSG plays like, and he knows better.)
(3)That OSG is either Town or the Cultist, and was trying to do a gambit. (This also is less likely, mainly because of I have never seen OSG do any gambits...)

So, you see, granted that OSG's vote was legitimate, there are only two possibilities; one of them being that he is Scum, the other that he is stupid town. I dont think OSG is stupid town, thus he is probably Scum.

With that said, OSG.

Of course, it could be a pressure vote to encourage you to respond to the question. This post seems like you intend to push a mislynch on OSG because you don't leave him any good option to respond with - he can either say he's a bad player, say he's a cultist, or say that he did a gambit (which it isn't and which he has said isn't a gambit).

I am singling you out because you voted someone who already had a vote on them. If you have cultist intentions, you would do this to put pressure on them hoping they would say something that would get everybody to vote them.

Isnt putting pressure on someone pretty much the sole purpose of an RVS vote? At the very least, my putting extra pressure is a null-tell, because town pressures other people as well.

This sounds like you are scrambling to me. My vote will stay on you for now.

How is he scrambling/panicking?

Until you explain things a bit more, my vote is on you, Peradon.

Mod: Can the jailor be converted?

[Jack A T]

Mod: Can the jailor be converted?

TDS: Yes.

[roo]

That is so weak sauce TDS. The vote. The analysis meh. But think about it. Voting one of the two guys that have been talking? Seems fairly easy. Taking the conceptual low road so to speak.

It seemed like inquiry was warranted. A pressure vote seemed excessive. That might just be me tho. Like zombie voting osg and then unvoting immidiately when he answered. That it was "satisfactory," lol.
Yeah it seemed unecessary to vote is all I'm saying when you are probably gonna unvote.

iirc osg, peradon, GM, tiruin, zombie, tds. have posted since the last time everyone had talked.

who is left teneb and someone else excluding me.

[roo]

nvm teneb said he is busy.

[Peradon]

Peradon

Peradon
I've noticed a mindset of quick talk with the rest of the people here. I ask you a hypothetical question:
> Let's assume you're a regular townie. How are you generally planning to find the singular cultist during Day 1? How do you view assertiveness versus aggressiveness in behavior?

Normally, I go with a pretty mundane Q&A scumhunting system, but I've found that it hasnt worked the best for me, so I'm going to try to some more mini-gambits like the one I did earlier.
As for your second question, I think that there is a time for both. I find aggressiveness to be best when actively pursuing someone who you are fairly certain is scum, whereas assertiveness for everything else.

Indeed. Indeed...
Now query once more. This game is a -very- different one from the others. Why I say so is based from my interpretation of things:
> We have scum--termed as the 'root'. This root is able to grow by 1 in the proceeding days since now.
The problem here is, if the root is dead then the danger only lies in finding where the growth occurred. An invariably lesser danger than what was once before.

So here's my query: In application of aggressiveness and assertiveness, I will jump onto my assumption that it seems you're playing those values for later, and are assessing others' demeanor/attitude for the present. So when do you think being assertive in inquiry would help? During D1, or during the later days?

To tell you the truth, I hadn't thought about it like that. I guess I would judge based on the situation. Generally though, I think assertiveness during day 1 is better, then aggressiveness afterwards. Don't count on me following that though, I don't really think in those terms... I've noticed I tend to flip back and forth a lot.

Peradon, I am starting to agree with Zombie Urist's point about you. You are freaking out way too much about this post.

Also, Teneb.

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

Your reply is reasonable at first:

The real question is: Why not? I was adding a little extra pressure to see what his reaction would be. Do you think this is scummy of me?

but then you claim it was part of a gambit, but give no results or evidence that you were doing a gambit.

What kind of question would you have me ask? Another random question that does absolutely nothing, such as "Why are you scum"? No, that's pointless. I just voted for him to see what kind of reactions I would get, as a test so to speak. With just one vote on someone, that person doesn't feel any pressure at all; It's to be expected. But when I add another one on, it starts getting serious.

In short, I was doing a test-gambit of sorts. One which has given interesting results. Unvote

This is so weak and a non-answer. What results did you get?

I'd actually rather not say, because doing so might put the scum on guard a little. I'll tell you later if I can more stuff together.

You say you'll tell us if you get more stuff together, but that hasn't seemed remotely close to happening yet, which leads me to believe that you completely lied about that gambit.

You say I never put forth the results on my gambit, yet I did. Don't try to make this into a failure to come through argument.(Thats not what its called, but I cant remember for the life of me what it is called... Anyway, you get the point.)
 

At this point, I had forgotten about your gambit because I was trying to piece together the arguments made by roo and others. You then attack me with one of the most blatant case of false dilema fallacy I have seen in a long time.

Ok then, lets analyse that argument:

(1)That OSG is the cultist, and he is trying to pin something on me, based on an RVS vote.

This is completely fine. It make a single of assumption, namely that you knew it was an RVS vote. I think this is a reasonable assumption, especially because you afterward gave no indication that you were not aware that it was an RVS vote. This argument is weak though, and I recognize that. A lot of my questions afterward were driving to confirm that you knew it was an RVS vote, and from everything you said, even if you didnt say it overtly, I think I can say that you did know it was RVS.

(2)That OSG is Town, and he legitimately thought that an RVS vote is scummy if it is placed on top of an existing post. (I find this to be less likely; I have seen what OSG plays like, and he knows better.)

This makes the same assumption, as well as another one: That RVS votes are not scummy. I see no way they can be, because by definition, they aren't serious votes. So I believe that assumption is well placed.

(3)That OSG is either Town or the Cultist, and was trying to do a gambit. (This also is less likely, mainly because of I have never seen OSG do any gambits...)

This note encompasses the rest of the choices. This would include a vote that is not serious, or a vote that has motives other than that of a vote(I dont think that makes sense.... Ask me to rephrase that if I need to.)

Thus, the argument boils down to the basic's of:
(1)Yes
(2)No
(3)Other(You said yourself that you werent pulling a gambit, which leaves only option 1 and 2.)

This encompasses everything, and thus my argument was not a false dilemma fallacy.

Throughout the whole rest of the game until now, I had not been concerned about you, but you still made grudges about my RVS vote on you, EVEN AFTER I HAD REMOVED MY VOTE. You still think my vote was scum-hut concerned.

So you are saying that the vote you put on me was in no way serious?

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

That sure sounds like a serious vote to me.

What? No, just no. Just because you take your vote off, doesnt mean that you never voted. There had to be motives behind that vote, and I think they are scummy motives. Thats why I am pursuing this, not because I'm holding a grudge.

You then build a case claiming that I am scrambling to find reasons to vote you, DESPITE ME NOT EVEN VOTING YOU.

That is a completely false statement. I never said you were scrambling to find a reason to vote for me, I just said you were scrambling, by which I meant that you're scrambling to defend yourself, and arent doing a very good job of it.

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

The real question is: Why not? I was adding a little extra pressure to see what his reaction would be. Do you think this is scummy of me?

Why did you do this instead of pressuring someone else? What makes putting more pressure on someone a better option?

I answered this already. I was doing a gambit, seeing what kind of reaction I would get.

This is so weak and a non-answer. What results did you get?

I'd actually rather not say, because doing so might put the scum on guard a little. I'll tell you later if I can more stuff together.

So now I'm sure you had nothing, you backed off from your rvs vote because osg was pressuring you, then made up doing a gambit after getting questioned, and now are just stalling for time.

That would be in your interpretation.

Though, seeing as how the interaction was entirely between me and OSG, I suppose from all ya'lls questions, he would have gathered that I suspect him. So, saying nothing wont do any good anymore, thanks to you.

I suspect OSG, and here's my rational:

Peradon: you give no reason or question along with this vote, and you also voted someone that already had a vote on them. Why?

I will be looking at the possible motives for the above post of OSG's. As I see it there are 3 possible motives:

(1)That OSG is the cultist, and he is trying to pin something on me, based on an RVS vote.
(2)That OSG is Town, and he legitimately thought that an RVS vote is scummy if it is placed on top of an existing post. (I find this to be less likely; I have seen what OSG plays like, and he knows better.)
(3)That OSG is either Town or the Cultist, and was trying to do a gambit. (This also is less likely, mainly because of I have never seen OSG do any gambits...)

So, you see, granted that OSG's vote was legitimate, there are only two possibilities; one of them being that he is Scum, the other that he is stupid town. I dont think OSG is stupid town, thus he is probably Scum.

With that said, OSG.

Of course, it could be a pressure vote to encourage you to respond to the question. This post seems like you intend to push a mislynch on OSG because you don't leave him any good option to respond with - he can either say he's a bad player, say he's a cultist, or say that he did a gambit (which it isn't and which he has said isn't a gambit).

OSG himself said it was semi-serious, which implies he thought it was scummy, and wasnt just putting a pressure vote on me.
Also, I'm not leaving him with no good option on purpose, its that fact that there is no good option to start with that's the reason I'm voting for him. That is how I usually do my scumhunting, I try to backtrack possible motives. In this case, the motives arent very good, unless he was trying a gambit.

I am singling you out because you voted someone who already had a vote on them. If you have cultist intentions, you would do this to put pressure on them hoping they would say something that would get everybody to vote them.

Isnt putting pressure on someone pretty much the sole purpose of an RVS vote? At the very least, my putting extra pressure is a null-tell, because town pressures other people as well.

This sounds like you are scrambling to me. My vote will stay on you for now.

How is he scrambling/panicking?

I cant say exactly, because its a very subjective thing. Basically his tone sounds panicked, and it seems like I have to reiterate the question in several ways before I can get an answer, like he's avoiding it. One tangible thing though, is his unvote of me after I pressure him, like he's trying to make amends.